The Hayride

On Monday The Louisiana House Will Take Up This National Popular Vote Nonsense…

On Monday The Louisiana House Will Take Up This National Popular Vote Nonsense…
May 04
12:03 2012

…because HB 1095, the bill to make Louisiana join the National Popular Vote Compact passed out of the House & Governmental Affairs Committee last Wednesday. It did so because two Republicans on that committee, Johnny Berthelot and Taylor Barras, both of whom were Democrats until a year or two ago, joined with the Democrat members of the committee to defeat a motion to defer the bill.

The Senate bill, SB 705, was killed in committee on that same day.

Now the bill will go to the House floor for debate and a vote. It has zero chance of becoming law, mind you, as the Jindal administration says it opposes the bill and will certainly veto it.

The question is whether a Republican-majority House of Representatives will fail to kill a bill being pushed by several big-money progressives, including and most notably its inventor, a Silicon Valley computer scientist and medical doctor named John Koza – who made his money off having invented lottery scratch-off tickets and who claims to be non-partisan. Except here’s Koza’s record of donating to political campaigns; you can decide whether you believe no ideological agenda is involved…

KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./EXECUTIVE 10/22/02 $5,000 Citizen Soldier Fund (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./EXECUTIVE 12/18/01 $5,000 PAC to the Future (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./EXECUTIVE 6/18/02 $5,000 PAC to the Future (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./EXECUTIVE 10/16/02 $5,000 Team Majority (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 7/14/93 $2,500 DNC Services Corp
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM/PRESIDENT 4/7/06 $2,100 Brown, Sherrod (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM/PRESIDENT 4/7/06 $2,100 Brown, Sherrod (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM/PRESIDENT 8/15/06 $2,100 Webb, James (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLINIUM/PRESIDENT 1/6/06 $2,100 Sanders, Bernie (I)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM INC/PRESIDENT 9/2/05 $2,100 Stabenow, Debbie (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM INC/PRESIDENT 9/2/05 $2,100 Stabenow, Debbie (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING/PRESIDENT 11/3/05 $2,000 Nelson, Ben (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./PRESIDENT 1/20/04 $2,000 Edwards, John (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 3/21/03 $2,000 Reid, Harry (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 3/21/03 $2,000 Reid, Harry (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLINEUM VENTURE 6/3/03 $2,000 Daschle, Tom (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
11/7/03 $2,000 Clark, Wesley (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./EXECUTIVE 6/19/02 $2,000 Norris, John (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING 3/31/00 $1,000 Nelson, Ben (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
12/23/99 $1,000 Keenan, Nancy (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 9/27/00 $1,000 Pelosi, Nancy (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 7/19/00 $1,000 Schweitzer, Brian David (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 9/3/99 $1,000 Kerrey, Bob (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 12/23/99 $1,000 Schweitzer, Brian David (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 8/29/02 $1,000 Johnson, Tim (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 10/4/02 $1,000 Cleland, Max (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 10/8/02 $1,000 Pryor, Mark (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 5/16/02 $1,000 Pingree, Chellie (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILL,CA 94023
THIRD MILLINEUM VENTURE 8/12/02 $1,000 Daschle, Tom (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM INC 10/19/96 $1,000 Karpan, Kathy (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM INC 10/18/96 $1,000 Johnson, Tim (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURES 10/10/92 $1,000 Rothman-Serot, Geri (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
10/19/96 $1,000 Wellstone, Paul (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
STANFORD UNIVERSITY 10/21/96 $1,000 Brennan, Joseph E (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 9/5/95 $1,000 Levin, Carl (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM INC 6/2/97 $1,000 Reid, Harry (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURE 10/21/96 $1,000 Bruggere, Tom (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
12/23/99 $1,000 Keenan, Nancy (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,DC 94023
DOCTOR 12/28/89 $1,000 Muenster, Theodore R (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
DOCTOR 12/28/89 $1,000 Harkin, Tom (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
MEDICAL INDUSTRIES 12/30/89 $1,000 Hill, Baron (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
10/13/92 $1,000 Stallings, Richard H (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILL,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 10/15/90 $1,000 Pell, Claiborne (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILL VC 11/4/91 $1,000 Lonsdale, Harold K (I)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 8/10/92 $1,000 Braun, Carol Moseley (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURES 9/22/92 $1,000 Feingold, Russell D (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
3RD MILLENIUM INC 10/21/96 $1,000 Swett, Dick (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
3RD MILLENNIUM VENT 1/28/98 $1,000 Kerrey, Bob (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
MEDICAL INDUSTRIES 6/30/91 $1,000 Hill, Baron (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC/SELF 1/28/04 $1,000 Chandler, Ben (D)

And more…

KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLINEUM VENTURE 6/3/03 $1,000 Daschle, Tom (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM ON-LINE PRODUCTS I 5/20/04 $1,000 Tenenbaum, Inez (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 12/10/03 $1,000 Feingold, Russ (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./PRESIDENT 6/17/06 $1,000 Bean, Melissa (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM/PRESIDENT 6/20/06 $1,000 Duckworth, Tammy (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 6/5/05 $1,000 Lieberman, Joe (I)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94022
THIRD MILLENIUM 10/25/91 $750 Lempert, Ted (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM/SELF 8/30/06 $600 Murphy, Chris (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
RETIRED 5/20/98 $500 Lamm, Dorothy V (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THE MILENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL LTD 9/28/98 $500 Kelley, Elizabeth (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 9/29/00 $500 Lawrence, Mark W (D)

Still more…

KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94022
THIRD MILLENIUM 5/2/91 $250 Lempert, Ted (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94022
THIRD MILLENIUM 11/15/90 $250 Lempert, Ted (D)
KOZA, JOHN
,
5/2/91 $250 Lempert, Ted (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
6/29/91 $250 DNC/Non-Federal Individual
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTO,CA 94023
8/23/93 $-108 Lempert, Ted (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
3/1/00 $-1,000 Kerrey, Bob (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILL,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 9/11/90 $-1,000 Pell, Claiborne (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
6/30/02 $-1,000 Norris, John (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
10/29/02 $-5,000 Team Majority (D)
KOZA, JOHN
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
10/2/97 $-20,000 DNC Services Corp
KOZA, JOHN DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 4/24/91 $20,000 DNC Services Corp
KOZA, JOHN DR
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
11/18/92 $-2,250 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte
KOZA, JOHN MD
LOS ALTOS,RI 94023
PHYSICIAN 12/18/89 $1,000 Pell, Claiborne (D)
KOZA, JOHN P MR
LOS ALTOS,NY 94023
EXECUTIVE 12/29/89 $1,000 Levin, Carl (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 10/2/95 $75,000 DNC/Non-Federal Unincorporated Assn Acct
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 7/11/00 $50,000 DNC/Non-Federal Individual (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 6/13/05 $26,700 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./PRESIDENT 4/18/05 $25,000 Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 6/22/01 $25,000 DNC/Non-Federal Individual (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
11/19/93 $25,000 DNC/Non-Federal Individual
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94022
5/8/98 $25,000 DNC/Non-Federal Individual
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
6/6/01 $25,000 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 7 (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
PALO ALTO,CA 94305
4/11/00 $25,000 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 7 (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 6/15/01 $25,000 DSCC/Non-Federal Unicorp Assoc (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 5/31/02 $25,000 DSCC/Non-Federal Unicorp Assoc (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
12/13/99 $20,000 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 7 (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
6/30/00 $20,000 DSCC/Non-Federal Unicorp Assoc (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 6/13/96 $20,000 DNC Services Corp
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 3/25/97 $20,000 California Victory ’98/DSCC Fund
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 3/19/03 $19,166 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 12/14/99 $13,000 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURE 3/30/99 $12,500 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 5 (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 9/29/00 $10,000 DNC Services Corp (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MELLENIUM VENTURE CAPITOL 11/3/00 $10,000 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 5 (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
9/18/98 $10,000 DSCC/Non-Federal Unicorp Assoc
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
6/16/98 $5,000 DCCC/Non-Federal Account 5
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
6/13/96 $5,000 DNC/Non-Federal Individual
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./PRESIDENT 3/23/01 $5,000 PAC for a Change (D)

We’re just getting warmed up…

KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 3/4/98 $5,000 Effective Government Cmte
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURE CAPITOL 6/30/97 $5,000 Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte
KOZA, JOHN R
,
PRESIDENTC GAMES INTERNATIONAL 9/21/92 $5,000 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
SCIENTIFIC GAMES INTL 11/22/93 $5,000 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 2/8/99 $5,000 PAC for a Change (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 2/25/00 $5,000 PAC for a Change (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
STANFORD,CA 94309
THIRD MILLENNIUM ON-LINE PRODUCTS/P 5/19/04 $5,000 Victory Campaign 2004
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./PRESIDENT 2/1/05 $5,000 PAC for a Change (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURE CAPITOL 9/24/91 $4,000 Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM/PRESIDENT 10/2/05 $2,500 Democratic Party of Arizona (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 5/23/05 $2,100 Clinton, Hillary (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 5/23/05 $2,100 Clinton, Hillary (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM/PRESIDENT 7/26/05 $2,100 Sanders, Bernie (I)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM/PRESIDENT 7/26/05 $2,100 Sanders, Bernie (I)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURE CAPITAL/PRE 6/2/06 $2,100 Technet
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94022
THIRD MILLENIUM 3/31/05 $2,000 Carper, Tom (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 6/16/03 $2,000 Dorgan, Byron L (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC/PRESIDENT 3/14/03 $2,000 Gephardt, Richard A (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC/PRESIDENT 6/20/03 $2,000 Graham, Bob (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURE CAPITAL/PRE 3/12/03 $2,000 Kerry, John (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMING/PRESIDENT 3/14/03 $2,000 Lieberman, Joe (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
STANFORD UNIVERSITY/PROFESSOR 2/25/03 $2,000 Dean, Howard (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL LT 12/6/89 $2,000 Democratic State Central Cmte/California
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 1/12/90 $1,000 Bradley, Bill (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
PHYSICIAN 12/31/89 $1,000 Kerry, John (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
6/1/92 $1,000 Yeakel, Lynn Hardy (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
9/24/96 $1,000 Tauscher, Ellen (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
1/27/92 $1,000 Kerrey, Bob (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
10/12/92 $1,000 Boxer, Barbara (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
6/29/90 $1,000 Akaka, Daniel K (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
9/25/90 $1,000 Johnston, J Bennett (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
10/18/90 $1,000 North Carolina Democratic Victory Fund
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94022
10/15/90 $1,000 Lonsdale, Harold K (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
SELF-EMPLOYED/PHYISICIAN 3/22/01 $1,000 Sherman, Brad (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
SELF-EMPLOYED/PHYISICIAN 6/26/01 $1,000 Sherman, Brad (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 5/30/02 $1,000 Bradbury, Bill (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 1/28/02 $1,000 Boxer, Barbara (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 1/28/02 $1,000 Boxer, Barbara (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 7/10/02 $1,000 Kirk, Ron (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 10/7/02 $1,000 Strickland, Tom (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 10/1/98 $1,000 Sanchez, Loretta (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 3/24/97 $1,000 Boxer, Barbara (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM CAPITAL 8/2/90 $1,000 Davis, Gray (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 5/31/91 $1,000 Wirth, Timothy E (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 8/29/91 $1,000 Democratic State Central Cmte/California
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 10/5/98 $1,000 Dunn, Sandie (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
VENTURE CAPITAL FIRM 4/26/91 $1,000 Graham, Bob (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMER INC 5/11/00 $1,000 Schiff, Adam (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING 3/26/02 $1,000 Wellstone, Paul (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING 3/26/02 $1,000 Wellstone, Paul (D)

There’s more…

KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING 9/28/02 $1,000 Shaheen, Jeanne (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THE THIRD MILLINEUM 4/25/91 $1,000 Breaux, John (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LAS VEGAS,NV 89109
THIRD MELLENNIUN VENTURE CAPITAL 4/22/91 $1,000 McCarthy, Leo T (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILIGNIUM 10/25/96 $1,000 Gantt, Harvey B (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 7/30/91 $1,000 Dixon, Alan J (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 8/31/95 $1,000 Rockefeller, John D IV (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 8/31/95 $1,000 Baucus, Max (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 7/30/96 $1,000 Durbin, Richard J (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
10/30/00 $1,000 Carnahan, Mel (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTAOS,CA 94023
3RD MILL VENTURES 10/14/92 $1,000 Owens, Wayne (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
3RD MILLENIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 6/14/95 $1,000 Clinton, Bill (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
3RD MILLENIUM VENTURE CORP 9/25/96 $1,000 Alioto, Michela (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
3RD MILLENNIUM VENTURE 4/22/93 $1,000 Bingaman, Jeff (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
3RD MILLENNIUM VENTURE 11/26/99 $1,000 Bingaman, Jeff (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
DOCTOR 9/19/95 $1,000 Harkin, Tom (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
INVESTOR 1/17/96 $1,000 Oregon Victory Fund
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
MILLENIUM 2/24/93 $1,000 Kennedy, Edward M (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
PHYSICIAN 10/16/92 $1,000 Murray, Patty (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
PHYSICIAN 10/19/96 $1,000 Sherman, Brad (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
PHYSICIAN 6/30/95 $1,000 Kerry, John (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
PHYSICIAN 6/19/00 $1,000 Sherman, Brad (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURES 10/14/92 $1,000 Campbell, Ben Nighthorse (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 9/9/92 $1,000 Eshoo, Anna (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM COMPANY 8/19/95 $1,000 Biden, Joseph R Jr (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM INC 8/21/97 $1,000 Gephardt, Richard A (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM INC 8/21/97 $1,000 Gephardt, Richard A (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM INC 8/17/99 $1,000 Gephardt, Richard A (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURE 12/14/99 $1,000 Feinstein, Dianne (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 10/18/96 $1,000 Minnick, Walt (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 9/8/95 $1,000 Boxer, Barbara (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 8/12/96 $1,000 Eshoo, Anna G (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 1/4/94 $1,000 Eshoo, Anna (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 4/27/93 $1,000 Mitchell, George J (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 4/27/93 $1,000 Mitchell, George J (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM CAPITAL 6/27/03 $1,000 Bayh, Evan (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 3/9/03 $1,000 Boxer, Barbara (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 3/9/03 $1,000 Boxer, Barbara (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM VENTURE 12/14/99 $1,000 Feinstein, Dianne (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 11/8/01 $1,000 Carnahan, Jean (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 11/8/01 $1,000 Carnahan, Jean (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 6/4/02 $1,000 Levin, Carl (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 6/4/02 $1,000 Levin, Carl (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM INC./PRESIDENT 5/1/01 $1,000 Gephardt, Richard A (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM ON-LINE PRODUCTS 8/20/04 $1,000 Salazar, Ken (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM ON-LINE PRODUCTS 5/24/04 $1,000 Salazar, Ken (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM/PRESIDENT 8/19/04 $1,000 Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM/PRESIDENT 4/22/04 $1,000 Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM/PRESIDENT 2/19/04 $1,000 Eshoo, Anna (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
MILLENIUM 2/15/05 $1,000 Kennedy, Edward M (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM COMPANY/OWNER 11/28/05 $1,000 Biden, Joseph R Jr (D)

Still going…

KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 12/28/93 $500 Lieberman, Joe (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 5/28/92 $500 Garamendi, Patricia (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILL,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC 8/18/00 $500 Kent, Robert ‘Bob’ Dean (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 8/21/97 $500 Effective Government Cmte
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 8/12/97 $500 Kennedy, Patrick J (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 7/15/92 $250 Garamendi, Patricia (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 9/23/92 $250 Garamendi, Patricia (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
3/14/94 $-1,000 Mitchell, George J (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
8/24/04 $-1,000 Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
8/25/04 $-1,000 Salazar, Ken (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
10/4/04 $-1,500 Boxer, Barbara (D)
KOZA, JOHN R
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
10/4/04 $-2,000 Boxer, Barbara (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 6/3/92 $80,000 DNC/Non-Federal Individual
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
GENETIC PROGRAMMING INC./PRESIDENT 3/20/03 $19,166 Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM/PRESIDENT 3/31/05 $2,100 Cantwell, Maria (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM/PRESIDENT 6/30/05 $2,100 Cantwell, Maria (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM/PRESIDENT 5/31/06 $2,100 Lofgren, Zoe (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
VENTURE CAPITAL 5/22/91 $1,000 Fowler, Wyche Jr (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE 5/7/91 $1,000 Feinstein, Dianne (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE 7/2/90 $1,000 Gantt, Harvey B (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM VENTURE CAPITAL 7/14/92 $1,000 Feinstein, Dianne (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 11/25/95 $1,000 Estruth, Jerry T (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
12/30/89 $1,000 Simon, Paul (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LAS VEGAS,NV 89109
DOCTOR 4/10/89 $1,000 Vinich, John P (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
DOCTOR 12/28/89 $1,000 Baucus, Max (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
DOCTOR 12/29/89 $1,000 Gore, Al (D)
KOZA, JOHN R DR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENIUM 12/11/89 $400 DNC Services Corp
KOZA, JOHN R MD
LOS ALTOS HILLS,CA 94023
PHYSICIAN 9/11/90 $1,000 Pell, Claiborne (D)
KOZA, JOHN R MR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM 10/17/02 $25,000 DNC/Non-Federal Unincorporated Assn Acct (D)
KOZA, JOHN R MR
ATLANTA,GA 30325
PRESIDENT/THIRD MILLENIUM 7/29/03 $19,166 DNC Services Corp (D)
KOZA, JOHN R MR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
THIRD MILLENNIUM/PRESIDENT 6/9/05 $9,700 DNC Services Corp (D)
KOZA, JOHN R MR
LOS ALTOS,CA 94023
9/9/91 $1,000 Wofford, Harris (D)

Koza is a financial Pez dispenser for Democrat candidates and political action committees, including some of the most Hard Left folks ever to come on the scene, and he’s never made a donation to a Republican in a federal election that Open Secrets has found.

And yet he’s managed to rope several useful Republicans on board the cause – including Jake Garn, David Durenberger, Tom Campbell and Saul Anuzis. Even Fred Thompson has fallen for this ruse.

But where the NPV compact has managed to pass, there aren’t many Republicans. Consider…

  • Signed into law in Illinois by one Rod Blagojevich
  • Signed into law in Maryland by Martin O’Malley
  • Signed into law in New Jersey by John Corzine
  • Signed into law in Washington by Christine Gregoire
  • Signed into law in Massachusetts by Deval Patrick
  • Signed into law in the District of Columbia by Adrian Fenty
  • Signed into law in Vermont by Peter Shumlin
  • Signed into law in California by Jerry Brown

Notice something about the names above? They’re all Democrats, they’re all hard-core leftists, at least one of them is in office thanks to election fraud, two of them are either in jail or headed there and all of them were elected thanks to machine politics driven by unions.

The idea that Republicans in Louisiana would get a snootful of this legislation and even think for five seconds about supporting it is ludicrous. The Founding Fathers crafted the Electoral College to keep slimy politics like that practiced by the Blagos and Corzines of the world from co-opting the presidency. They specifically designed the United States of  America as a constitutional representative republic and NOT a direct democracy because they were fully aware of the dangers therein.

Remember Ben Franklin’s admonition. Asked what the framers of the Constitution had wrought, he answered, “A Republic – if you can keep it.”

The National Popular Vote compact is an assault on one of the key pillars of our republic. Voting for it means you’d prefer to side with John Koza and his never-ending flow of campaign dollars to Howard Dean and Bernie Sanders over the Founding Fathers.

Or you’re influenced by lobbyists.

The proponents of NPV have hired the high-dollar Baton Rouge lobbying firm of Roedel Parsons, with no less than seven of their lobbyists including Johnny Koch – who is known as one of the best and most influential players on the scene at the capitol – and similarly well-known lobbyist Randy Hayden to work the Capitol. Koch and Hayden are good guys, but in this case they’re just plain wrong.

NPV’s proponents also flew in Minnesota state representative Laura Brod to lobby for the bill. Brod, a Republican and a reputed conservative, is apparently one of the usual suspects brought in for these legislative fights. One has to ask, however, why anyone from Louisiana should listen to a lecture on elections from a Minnesota Republican – after all, the primary fear of NPV is the open invitation to widespread voter fraud it would offer, and it wasn’t even four years ago that Minnesota Republicans stood by helpless while that state’s Democrats stole an election on behalf of Al Franken – Al Franken! – from Norm Coleman using ballots found in garbage cans and trunks of cars and illegal votes by convicted felons. The idea that anyone from Minnesota should lecture Louisianans on suborning our presidential electors to results from places like that is breathtaking.

The Weekly Standard took up this issue – and panned it – back in August…

Indeed, the money flowing into NPV tells a very different story about who wants this “reform” and why. Koza—who hit the jackpot when he patented the scratch-off lottery ticket and then convinced states to sell them—has reportedly pledged $12 million to his organization. Koza has given tens of thousands of dollars to various Democratic Party committees and liberal candidates; he was an Al Gore elector in 2000. New York businessman Tom Golisano, who has also pledged millions to NPV, is quick to point out that he is a registered Republican—even though he supported John Kerry and gave a cool $1 million to the Democratic National Convention in 2008.

The organizational support behind NPV is similarly lopsided, coming almost exclusively from left wing groups such as Common Cause, the American Civil Liberties Union, FairVote, and the League of Women Voters. A George Soros-funded group, DEMOS, has supported NPV, and Soros’s son, Jonathan Soros, has written in favor of the plan.

Are we to believe that these left wing financiers and activists are really on the same side as the Republican Party or the Tea Party?

NPV alleges that Republicans will be helped by its proposal for a national direct election—at least that’s what it tells Republicans. Allegedly, eliminating swing states and making “every voter equal” will enable conservative voices across the country to be better heard. The message is seductive: If you believe this is a center right country, how can you not believe that direct election of the president would take us in a center right direction?

The Republican National Committee heard these arguments. On August 5, it rejected them. The RNC overwhelmingly adopted a resolution by Alaska state committeewoman Debbie Joslin in firm opposition to the NPV plan.

It’s inconceivable that the Louisiana House of Representatives would support this dangerous and stupid idea, Berthelot and Barras’ misguided committee votes notwithstanding. But those concerned about it might do well to contact their state representative and express in the strongest possible terms that a vote in favor of this nonsense is a vote in favor of obliteration at the hands of conservative voters in 2015.

Related Articles

19 Comments

  1. Ooty Cat
    Ooty Cat May 04, 17:41

    Dr. Koza is not a medical doctor. He has a PhD in Computer Science from the University of Michigan (1972). He has his own company Genetic Programming Inc. He is also President, Third Millennium Venture Capital Limited (since l987), Third Millennium On-Line Products Inc. (since 2000) and Genetic Programming Inc. (since l998).

    Tom Golisano, billionaire Republican businessman and philanthropist, is a National Popular Vote $upporter and spokesperson.

    In 1969, The U.S. House of Representatives voted for a national popular vote by a 338–70 margin. It was endorsed by Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush, and Bob Dole.

    Jason Cabel Roe, a lifelong conservative activist and professional political consultant wrote in "National Popular Vote is Good for Republicans:".

    "I strongly support National Popular Vote. It is good for Republicans, it is good for conservatives… , and it is good for America. National Popular Vote is not a grand conspiracy hatched by the Left to manipulate the election outcome.
    It is a bipartisan effort of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents to allow every state – and every voter – to have a say in the selection of our President, and not just the 15 Battle Ground States.

    National Popular Vote is not a change that can be easily explained, nor the ramifications thought through in sound bites. It takes a keen political mind to understand just how much it can help… Republicans…. Opponents either have a knee-jerk reaction to the idea or don’t fully understand it…. We believe that the more exposure and discussion the reform has the more support that will build for it."

    Former Tennessee U.S. Senator and 2008 presidential candidate Fred Thompson(R), and former U.S. Representative Tom Tancredo (R-CO) are co-champions of National Popular Vote.

    National Popular Vote's National Advisory Board includes former Senators Jake Garn (R–UT), and David Durenberger (R–MN) and former congressman John Buchanan (R–AL).

    Saul Anuzis, former Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party for five years and a former candidate for chairman of the Republican National Committee, supports the National Popular Vote plan as the fairest way to make sure every vote matters, and also as a way to help Conservative Republican candidates. This is not a partisan issue and the NPV plan would not help either party over the other.

    Rich Bolen, a Constitutional scholar, attorney at law, and Republican Party Chairman for Lexington County, South Carolina, wrote:"A Conservative Case for National Popular Vote: Why I support a state-based plan to reform the Electoral College."

    Some other supporters who wrote forewords to "Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote " http://www.every-vote-equal.com/ include:

    Laura Brod served in the Minnesota House of Representatives from 2003 to 2010 and was the ranking Republican member of the Tax Committee. She is the Minnesota Public Sector Chair for ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) and active in the Council of State Governments.

    Dean Murray is a member of the New York State Assembly. He was a Tea Party organizer before being elected to the Assembly as a Republican, Conservative Party member in February 2010. He was described by Fox News as the first Tea Party candidate elected to office in the United States.

    Thomas L. Pearce served as a Michigan State Representative from 2005–2010 and was appointed Dean of the Republican Caucus. He has led several faith-based initiatives in Lansing.

    In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in virtually every state surveyed in recent polls in closely divided Battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA 75%, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%; in Small states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and Border states: AR – 80%,, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, TN – 83%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and in other states polled: AZ – 67%, CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%.

    Most Americans don't care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state… they care whether he/she wins the White House. Voters want to know, that even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was directly and equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it's wrong for the candidate with the most popular votes to lose. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.

    National Popular Vote has nothing to do with direct democracy. Direct democracy is a form of government in which people vote on policy initiatives directly. With National Popular Vote, the United States would still be a representative democracy, in which citizens continue to elect the President by a majority of Electoral College votes, to represent us and conduct the business of government in the periods between elections.

    The Republic is not in any danger from National Popular Vote.

  2. Ooty Cat
    Ooty Cat May 04, 17:44

    The current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes maximizes the incentive and opportunity for fraud. A very few people can change the national outcome by changing a small number of votes in one closely divided battleground state. With the current system all of a state's electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who receives a bare plurality of the votes in each state. The sheer magnitude of the national popular vote number, compared to individual state vote totals, is much more robust against manipulation.

    National Popular Vote would limit the benefits to be gained by fraud. One fraudulent vote would only win one vote in the return. In the current electoral system, one fraudulent vote could mean 55 electoral votes, or just enough electoral votes to win the presidency without having the most popular votes in the country.

    Hendrik Hertzberg wrote: "To steal the closest popular-vote election in American history, you'd have to steal more than a hundred thousand votes…To steal the closest electoral-vote election in American history, you'd have to steal around 500 votes, all in one state….

    For a national popular vote election to be as easy to switch as 2000, it would have to be two hundred times closer than the 1960 election–and, in popular-vote terms, forty times closer than 2000 itself.

    Which, I ask you, is an easier mark for vote-stealers, the status quo or N.P.V.[National Popular Vote]? Which offers thieves a better shot at success for a smaller effort?"

  3. Ooty Cat
    Ooty Cat May 04, 17:48

    The National Popular Vote bill would change existing state winner-take-all laws that award all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who get the most popular votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but since enacted by 48 states), to a system guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes for, and the Presidency to, the candidate getting the most popular votes in the entire United States.

    The National Popular Vote bill preserves the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections. It ensures that every vote is equal, every voter will matter, in every state, in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

    Under National Popular Vote, every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the state counts and national count. The candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC would get the 270+ electoral votes from the enacting states. That majority of electoral votes guarantees the candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC wins the presidency.

    National Popular Vote would give a voice to the minority party voters in each state. Now their votes are counted only for the candidate they did not vote for. Now they don't matter to their candidate.

    And now votes, beyond the one needed to get the most votes in the state, for winning in a state, are wasted and don't matter to candidates. Utah (5 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 385,000 "wasted" votes for Bush in 2004. 8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

    With National Popular Vote, every vote, everywhere would be counted equally for, and directly assist, the candidate for whom it was cast.

    Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states. The political reality would be that when every vote is equal, the campaign must be run in every part of the country, including Louisiana.

    • Deryl Bryant
      Deryl Bryant May 04, 20:01

      I would suggest that you get a bit more educated so that you MIGHT learn that the United STATES of America is a REPUBLIC and not a "mob rule democracy" which is exactly what you are promoting.

      Furthermore, you are completely off-base with your twisted mentality to imply that a "losing vote" is wasted. A "vote" is a right to express your opinion, it is NOT a guarantee that your opinion will carry the day. Could you possibly be more ridiculous in saying something so assinine? Of course, that kind of nonsense, like the rest of your diatribe, probably plays well with those endoctrinated into YOUR outcome based education/propaganda.

      The NPV lunacy completely disregards regional customs and variance. It would allow people in high populated areas with the least knowledge of a lesser populated region to DICTATE their personal beliefs and circumstance which would likely be completely alien to the majority of communities in this country.

      I don't live in Chicago, New York, San Francisco because I exerise the rights granted to me in the Constitution and I sure as hell don't want anyone that does to be telling me how to live in Louisiana.

    • Ooty Cat
      Ooty Cat May 04, 21:11

      We are a Republic and a Democracy. They are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

      The National Popular Vote bill would end the disproportionate attention and influence of the "mob" in the current handful of closely divided battleground states, such as Florida, while the "mobs" of the vast majority of states are ignored. 98% of the 2008 campaign events involving a presidential or vice-presidential candidate occurred in just 15 closely divided "battleground" states. 12 of the 13 lowest population states (3-4 electoral votes), that are non-competitive are ignored, in presidential elections. 9 of the original 13 states are considered “fly-over” now. Over half (57%) of the events were in just four states (Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Virginia). Similarly, 98% of ad spending took place in these 15 "battleground" states.

      The Republic is not in any danger from National Popular Vote.
      National Popular Vote has nothing to do with pure democracy. Pure democracy is a form of government in which people vote on policy initiatives directly. With National Popular Vote, the United States would still be a representative democracy, in which citizens continue to elect the President by a majority of Electoral College votes, to represent us and conduct the business of government in the periods between elections.

    • Ooty Cat
      Ooty Cat May 04, 21:20

      I did not imply that a losing vote, in all other kinds of elections in the country, is wasted.

      National Popular Vote would give a voice to the minority party voters in presidential elections in each state. Now their votes ARE COUNTED ONLY FOR THE CANDIDATE THEY DID NOT VOTE FOR. Now they don't matter to their candidate.

      And now votes, beyond the one needed to get the most votes in the state, for winning in a state, are wasted and don't matter to candidates. Utah (5 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 385,000 "wasted" votes for Bush in 2004. 8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

      Votes, for the winner, Bush, were "wasted" when they didn't matter to, and didn't help him.

      Under National Popular Vote, every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the state counts and national count. The candidate with the most popular votes would win.

      Most Americans don't care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state. . . they care whether he/she wins the White House. Voters want to know, that even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was directly and equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it's wrong for the candidate with the most popular votes to lose. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.

    • Ooty Cat
      Ooty Cat May 04, 21:22

      With the current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes, it could only take winning a bare plurality of popular votes in the 11 most populous states, containing 56% of the population of the United States, for a candidate to win the Presidency — that is, a mere 26% of the nation's votes!

    • Ooty Cat
      Ooty Cat May 04, 21:23

      With National Popular Vote, big cities would not control the outcome.
      The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 19% of the population of the United States.
      Suburbs and exurbs often vote Republican.

      If big cities controlled the outcome of elections, the governors and U.S. Senators would be Democratic in virtually every state with a significant city.

      Even in California state-wide elections, candidates for governor or U.S. Senate don't campaign just in Los Angeles and San Francisco, and those places don't control the outcome (otherwise California wouldn't have recently had Republican governors Reagan, Dukemejian, Wilson, and Schwarzenegger). A vote in rural Alpine county is just an important as a vote in Los Angeles. If Los Angeles cannot control statewide elections in California, it can hardly control a nationwide election.

      In fact, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland together cannot control a statewide election in California.

      Similarly, Republicans dominate Texas politics without carrying big cities such as Dallas and Houston.

      There are numerous other examples of Republicans who won races for governor and U.S. Senator in other states that have big cities (e.g., New York, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts) without ever carrying the big cities of their respective states.

      A nationwide presidential campaign, with every vote equal, would be run the way presidential candidates campaign to win the electoral votes of closely divided battleground states, such as Ohio and Florida, under the state-by-state winner-take-all methods. The big cities in those battleground states do not receive all the attention, much less control the outcome. Cleveland and Miami do not receive all the attention or control the outcome in Ohio and Florida.

      The itineraries of presidential candidates in battleground states (and their allocation of other campaign resources in battleground states) reflect the political reality that every gubernatorial or senatorial candidate knows. When and where every vote is equal, a campaign must be run everywhere.

    • Vincent Gore
      Vincent Gore May 04, 22:17

      Ooty Cat You couldn't be MORE WRONG. Democracies and Republics ARE mutually exclusive, by design. The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it." This exchange was recorded by Constitution signer James McHenry in a diary entry that was later reproduced in the 1906 American Historical Review. Yet in more recent years, Franklin has occasionally been misquoted as having said, "A democracy, if you can keep it." The NRA's Charleton Heston quoted Franklin this way, for example, in a CBS 60 Minutes interview with Mike Wallace that was aired on December 20, 1998. This misquote is a serious one, since the difference between a democracy and a republic is not merely a question of semantics but is fundamental. The word "republic" comes from the Latin res publica — which means simply "the public thing(s)," or more simply "the law(s)."… "Democracy," on the other hand, is derived from the Greek words demos and kratein, which translates to "the people to rule." Democracy, therefore, has always been synonymous with majority rule. The Founding Fathers supported the view that (in the words of the Declaration of Independence) "Men … are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights." They recognized that such rights should not be violated by an unrestrained majority any more than they should be violated by an unrestrained king or monarch. In fact, they recognized that majority rule would quickly degenerate into mobocracy and then into tyranny. They had studied the history of both the Greek democracies and the Roman republic. They had a clear understanding of the relative freedom and stability that had characterized the latter, and of the strife and turmoil — quickly followed by despotism — that had characterized the former. In drafting the Constitution, they created a government of law and not of men, a republic and not a democracy. But don't take my word for it! Consider the words of the Founding Fathers themselves, who — one after another — condemned democracy.

      • Samuel Adams, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, championed the new Constitution in his state precisely because it would not create a democracy. "Democracy never lasts long," he noted. "It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself." He insisted, "There was never a democracy that 'did not commit suicide.'"

      • New York's Alexander Hamilton, in a June 21, 1788 speech urging ratification of the Constitution in his state, thundered: "It has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity." Earlier, at the Constitutional Convention, Hamilton stated: "We are a Republican Government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy."

      • James Madison, who is rightly known as the "Father of the Constitution," wrote in The Federalist, No. 10: "… democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they are violent in their deaths." The Federalist Papers, recall, were written during the time of the ratification debate to encourage the citizens of New York to support the new Constitution.

      • George Washington, who had presided over the Constitutional Convention and later accepted the honor of being chosen as the first President of the United States under its new Constitution, indicated during his inaugural address on April 30, 1789, that he would dedicate himself to "the preservation … of the republican model of government."

      • Fisher Ames served in the U.S. Congress during the eight years of George Washington's presidency. A prominent member of the Massachusetts convention that ratified the Constitution for that state, he termed democracy "a government by the passions of the multitude, or, no less correctly, according to the vices and ambitions of their leaders." On another occasion, he labeled democracy's majority rule one of "the intermediate stages towards … tyranny." He later opined: "Democracy, in its best state, is but the politics of Bedlam; while kept chained, its thoughts are frantic, but when it breaks loose, it kills the keeper, fires the building, and perishes." And in an essay entitled The Mire of Democracy, he wrote that the framers of the Constitution "intended our government should be a republic, which differs more widely from a democracy than a democracy from a despotism."

      In light of the Founders' view on the subject of republics and democracies, it is not surprising that the Constitution does not contain the word "democracy," but does mandate: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government."

      You need to go back and do some homework, junior.

    • Ooty Cat
      Ooty Cat May 04, 22:36

      National Popular Vote has NOTHING TO DO with pure democracy.

      Pure democracy is a form of government in which people vote on policy initiatives directly.

      With National Popular Vote, the United States would still have a republican form of government, with each state controlling their presidential election, in which citizens continue to elect the President by a majority of Electoral College votes, to represent us and conduct the business of government in the periods between elections.

    • Deryl Bryant
      Deryl Bryant May 05, 18:01

      Yes, the NPV would DESTROY the ability of Louisiana residents to speak as one voice. It would dissolve our votes into oblivion, being diluted to death by the much larger populations in the metropolitan areas. Rural America would suffer the most.

      No, WE DO NOT LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY…..we live in a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC and they are NOT the same…..take the time to get a better education and you will be afforded the difference. We are a collection of different states, with different views, with different circumstance.

      You would do well to take note of a very special part of the United States Constitution. It was put there to protect the sovereignty of EACH state which NPV would destroy.

      "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

      The next logical step after passing the NPV, would be to eliminate the U.S. Senate.

      This NPV is part of a Globalist movement/agenda to wipe away ALL boarders and facilitate a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.

    • Susan Evoy
      Susan Evoy May 05, 18:20

      With the Electoral College and federalism, the Founding Fathers meant to empower the states to pursue their own interests within the confines of the Constitution. The National Popular Vote is an exercise of that power, not an attack upon it.

      I have not said we live in a democracy.
      And National Popular Vote does not change our Constitution, and would not change our form of government.
      National Popular Vote has nothing to do with direct or pure democracy.

      The current state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but since enacted by 48 states), under which all of a state's electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state, ensures that the candidates, after the primaries, in 2012 will not reach out to about 76% of the states and their voters. Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind.

      More than 2/3rds of the states and people have been just spectators to the presidential elections. That's more than 85 million voters, 200 million Americans, 9 of the original 13 states.

      None of the 10 most rural states (VT, ME, WV, MS, SD, AR, MT, ND, AL, and KY) is a battleground state.
      The current state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes does not enhance the influence of rural states, because the most rural states are not battleground states, and are ignored in presidential elections.

      National Popular Votes uses the "plenary" and "exclusive" authority of state legislatures, over the manner of awarding their electoral votes, as the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly stated.

      Equal representation of the states in the U.S. Senate is explicitly established in the U.S. Constitution. This feature cannot be changed by state law or an interstate compact.

      In fact, equal representation of the states in the U.S. Senate may not even be amended by an ordinary federal constitutional amendment. Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides:

      “No State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.”

      Thus, this feature of the U.S. Constitution may only be changed by a constitutional amendment approved by unanimous consent of all 50 states.

      In contrast, the U.S. Constitution explicitly assigns the power of selecting the manner of appointing presidential electors to the states. The enactment by a state legislature of the National Popular Vote bill is an exercise of a legislature’s existing powers under the U.S. Constitution.

      In short, enactment of the National Popular Vote compact has no bearing on the federal constitutional provisions establishing equal representation of the states in the U.S. Senate.

      NPV is MOST CERTAINLY NOT a part of a Globalist movement/agenda to wipe away ALL boarders and facilitate a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.

      NPV is meant to make every American voter, everywhere in the country, politically relevant and equal in every presidential election, and ensure that the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

      Most Americans don't care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state. . . they care whether he/she wins the White House. Voters want to know, that even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was directly and equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it's wrong for the candidate with the most popular votes to lose. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.

    • Ooty Cat
      Ooty Cat May 05, 18:27

      With the Electoral College and federalism, the Founding Fathers meant to empower the states to pursue their own interests within the confines of the Constitution. The National Popular Vote is an exercise of that power, not an attack upon it.

      National Popular Vote does not change our Constitution, and would not change our form of government.
      National Popular Vote has nothing to do with direct or pure democracy.
      Pure democracy is a form of government in which people vote on policy initiatives directly. With National Popular Vote, the United States would still be a representative democracy, in which citizens continue to elect the President by a majority of Electoral College votes, to represent us and conduct the business of government in the periods between elections.

      The current state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but since enacted by 48 states), under which all of a state's electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state, ensures that the candidates, after the primaries, in 2012 will not reach out to about 76% of the states and their voters. Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind.

      More than 2/3rds of the states and people have been just spectators to the presidential elections. That's more than 85 million voters, 200 million Americans, 9 of the original 13 states.

      None of the 10 most rural states (VT, ME, WV, MS, SD, AR, MT, ND, AL, and KY) is a battleground state.
      The current state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes does not enhance the influence of rural states, because the most rural states are not battleground states, and are ignored in presidential elections.

      National Popular Votes uses the "plenary" and "exclusive" authority of state legislatures, over the manner of awarding their electoral votes, as the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly stated.

      Equal representation of the states in the U.S. Senate is explicitly established in the U.S. Constitution. This feature cannot be changed by state law or an interstate compact.

      In fact, equal representation of the states in the U.S. Senate may not even be amended by an ordinary federal constitutional amendment. Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides:

      “No State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.”

      Thus, this feature of the U.S. Constitution may only be changed by a constitutional amendment approved by unanimous consent of all 50 states.

      In contrast, the U.S. Constitution explicitly assigns the power of selecting the manner of appointing presidential electors to the states. The enactment by a state legislature of the National Popular Vote bill is an exercise of a legislature’s existing powers under the U.S. Constitution.

      In short, enactment of the National Popular Vote compact has no bearing on the federal constitutional provisions establishing equal representation of the states in the U.S. Senate.

      NPV is MOST CERTAINLY NOT a part of a Globalist movement/agenda to wipe away ALL boarders and facilitate a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.

      NPV is meant to make every American voter, everywhere in the country, politically relevant and equal in every presidential election, and ensure that the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

      Most Americans don't care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state. . . they care whether he/she wins the White House. Voters want to know, that even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was directly and equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it's wrong for the candidate with the most popular votes to lose. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.

  4. Elizabeth Weber Levy
    Elizabeth Weber Levy May 04, 18:46

    "Had every Athenian citizen been a Socrates, every Athenian assembly would still have been a mob." – James Madison.

  5. Deryl Bryant
    Deryl Bryant May 04, 19:44

    "The National Popular Vote bill would change existing state winner-take-all laws that award all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who get the most popular votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but since enacted by 48 states), to a system guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes for, and the Presidency to, the candidate getting the most popular votes in the entire United States. "

    I DO NOT want to change existing law and allow the people in San Francisco and New York City and Chicago and every other major city to control the vote in Louisiana and that is EXACTLY what this idiot bill would do.

  6. Matt Galey
    Matt Galey May 05, 01:55

    Sigh… more garbage legislation wasting time and money!

  7. Frederick Mac Whitley
    Frederick Mac Whitley May 07, 14:30

    THIS SIGN IS MISLEADING , ''VOTE FOR MARRIAGE ''' OF WHO YOU IDIOT. ONE MAN , ONE WOMAN THAT SIMPLE. I WANT TO BE PROUD OF THE STATE I LIVE IN. GAYS AND QUEERS NEED TO EXIT NOW GO TO SOME OTHER STATE. THE DEMOCRATS ARE UNDERHANDED AND IS TRYING TO TRIP UP THE PEOPLE HERE BY ''WORDING '' THE ADMENDMENT SO THEY CAN NOT UNDERSTAND IT. JUST LIKE THE SCUM BAGS………A CHILD DOES NOT NEED TO BE EXPOSED TO THIS SIN SICK CRAZINESS…………..

Only registered users can comment.

Subscribe To The Nooner!

Categories

Archives